CLIPP
Christiani Lehmanni inedita, publicanda, publicata
titulus
Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
huius textus situs retis mundialis
http://www.christianlehmann.eu/publ/
lehmann_complex_prepositions.pdf
dies manuscripti postremum modificati
04.09.2016
occasio orationis habitae
Workshop on Emergence and Evolution of Complex
Adpositions in European Languages at the 49th Annual
Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea, 31/08 –
03/09/2016, Naples
volumen publicationem continens
ignotum
annus publicationis
ignotum
paginae
ignotae
Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
Christian Lehmann
University of Erfurt
Praepositio enim nec adverbio
iungitur nec praepositioni. (Servius,
Comm. in Vergilii Aeneidem VII, 289)
‘For a preposition does not combine
with an adverb or a preposition.’
Abstract
From among the various processes that form prepositions in the history from Latin to
Castilian, the investigation concentrates on the formation of prepositional adverbs like
Spanish delante (de) ‘in front (of)’. There are two mechanisms for their formation:
a) An adverb or a preposition is preceded by a superordinate primary local preposition
which initially specifies a local relation, but ends up as a reinforcing expansion of its
base.
b) An adverb is converted into a preposition by a following primary preposition which
serves as a relationalizer.
Initially, both combinations have a regular semantosyntactic structure. Contrary to the
verdict by ancient grammarians, construction #a is even necessary when the prepositional
adverb designates a spatial region, but a local relation to it is to be specified, in addition.
Construction #b replaces the Classical Latin case government.
In case #a, the syntactic structure is often destroyed by univerbation, and the resulting
reinforced preposition is lexicalized. In case #b, the alternation between adverb and rela tionalized preposition is regular and bidirectional, so that the combination of adverb and
relationalizer is normally not univerbated. The exception desde is given some attention.
As a result, the formation of prepositions of this structure is, at the outset, not a matter of
word formation, and such complex prepositions are therefore not compound prepositions,
but instead lexicalized univerbations.
2
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
1
Introduction
For the sake of the present treatment, a complex adposition is one consisting of more than
one word.1 It may be located on a cline like the one shown in Diagram 1 (cf. Fagard & De
Mulder 2007:10).
Diagram 1 Grammaticalization of adpositions
1
2
3
adpositional locution > complex adposition > simple adposition >
4
functional
adposition2
The distinction between stages 1 and 2 will not be at stake here. The focus of this paper is on
the passage from stage 2 to 3.
Late Latin and the Romance languages have lots of morphologically complex prepositions.3 Many of them are renewals of simple prepositions of earlier Latin. For instance, while
the monomorphemic ante was sufficient in Classical Latin to signify ‘before’, its modern
Spanish equivalent delante de consists etymologically of four morphs, de+l+ante+de. These
formations have been called ‘compound prepositions’ in traditional grammar and have essentially been presented as agglomerations of series of prepositions and adverbs. Even in
contemporary linguistics (e.g. in Hagège 2010, ch. 3.3.2), they are considered compound
prepositions. However, nobody has yet formulated rules of compounding in Latin and the
Romance languages that could produce such monsters. Here an alternative approach will be
taken, applying a syntactic analysis to such formations. This is not without its problems,
either, since doctrines like the one formulated in the motto are not completely without force
(cf. Hagège 2010:39f).
There is also a methodological problem. Late Latin texts abound in complex prepositions
which find no continuation in Romance prepositions.4 For instance, we find erga in ‘towards’,
per ex ‘by’, absque sine ‘without’ (ap. Löfstedt 1959:169f) and many similar more or less
bright innovations. It has to be born in mind that most of those texts were written by people
who had a very limited command of Latin and only knew that in writing, one had to express
oneself in a pretentious way. For a linguistic analysis of the formation of complex prepositions in the history of Latin and Romance, it is not necessary to account for each and every
occurrence found in the documents. We will here concentrate on one pattern which emerges as
productive once the classical variety of Latin is left behind.
1
Hagège 2010, 38f restricts the term complex adposition to combinations of an adposition with a case
affix on the complement; cf. fn. 12.
2
The term ‘functional preposition’, used l.c. and occasionally found in the literature, is here repro duced reluctantly. Every element of the language system is functional. The thing meant – prepositions
like French de ‘of’ and à ‘to’ – is also called ‘grammatical (as opposed to lexical) preposition’ or ‘case
marker’.
3
Hofmann & Szantyr 1965, §160 still serves as a useful survey of the Latin material.
4
A rather comprehensive enumeration is in Hamp 1888:367.
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
2
Local relations and case relators
2.1
Local relations
3
A physical object occupies a spot in space. It generates spatial regions on and around itself.
Those that are based on its three dimensions are dimensional regions: top vs. bottom, front
vs. back, right vs. left side. Those that are based on the topological structure generated by the
object are topological regions: inside vs. outside [± contact], proximity [± contact] vs. distance (s. Lehmann 1992). Even the dimensional spatial regions are not only physical parts of
the object. Instead, they are projections from those physical sides into the adjacent space. For
instance, the front of a church is not only its façade, but the space projected from the façade in
the direction away from the center of the physical object.
A place is a two- or three-dimensional sector of space which can serve as a landmark (=
reference point) for the positioning of some other object. Some physical objects are primarily
conceptualized as places. Any other physical object can function as a landmark and, thus, be
treated as a place (Hagège 2010:83-91). Spatial regions are places par excellence.
A local relation is a relation between a physical object to be localized and a landmark. It
is either a relation of rest, which is called essive, or a relation of motion, called lative. Various
lative relations can be distinguished in theory and in languages. 5 Latin and Romance only
code in their grammar three lative relations: motion towards the landmark is the allative relation, motion away is the ablative relation and motion past or through the landmark is the
perlative relation.6 The core of the subparadigm of the lative relations is the opposition
between marked ablative and unmarked allative relation.
Given the meronymic relation between the spatial region and the landmark, either one
may be construed as the relatum of a local relation. In the English we passed in front of the
church, the spatial region is the relatum of the local relation; in the Italian passammo di fronte
alla chiesa, lit. ‘frontwards at the church’, it is the church. In languages reflecting the former
conception, a syntagmatic combination of the expressions coding the local relation and the
spatial region is commonly produced, as in E1a.
E1
a.
Ecce sunt anni quinquaginta et supra que de trans Pado hic me conlocaui (Codici
diplomatici Longobardi n° 19 [715], p. 74)
‘Look it is fifty and more years that I have moved here from beyond the Po’
b.
Quinquaginta anni sunt quod de Lueana [i.e. Lucana] ciuitate hic me collocaui
(o.c. p. 76)
‘It is fifty years that I moved here from the town of Lucca’
LATIN
As evidenced in the motto of the present text, ancient Latin grammarians declared a combination of two prepositions as in E1a ungrammatical (more quotations in Hamp 1888:323f). A
comparison between #a and #b, however, reveals that the two prepositions differ in function:
The ablative relation extends to a place. The latter may (#a) or may not (#b) be based on a
spatial region of the landmark. In structural terms: a primary local preposition like de can
govern a noun phrase (#b) or an adverbial (#a; cf. Norberg 1944:79 and Hagège 2010:59-61).
Proof of this is that the adverbial may, indeed, be represented by a mere adverb, as in E2.
Here, again, de codes the local relation, while intus codes the spatial region.
5
However, the set of 16 lative relations enumerated in Hagège 2010:261, 285f results from a combi nation of local relations with spatial regions.
6
Other established terms for the four local relations are location, direction, source and path (Luraghi
2010:21). Some languages possess, in addition, a case relator for the retrolative relation, which in
European languages is coded in verbs such as fetch.
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
E2
4
omnia haec mala de intus procedunt (Itala [~300], Codex Corbeiensis II, Mark 7,
23)
‘all these evils come from inside’
LATIN
Given the semantic and structural adjacency of the local relator and the formative coding the
spatial region, there is a tendency to merge the two functions into one morpheme, typically an
adposition. For instance, the Latin preposition ex codes, at the same time, the interior of the
landmark and ablative relation with respect to it. On the other hand, since spatial regions are
per se places, given some spatial situation comprising rest or motion with respect to a spatial
region of some landmark, there is often no necessity to specify the local relation to this spatial
region by a local relator. For instance, the Latin preposition ad codes lateral contact with a
landmark. It combines indistinctly with verbs of rest and of motion, with no intervening case
relator marking the local relation. Both the fact that there must be one such relation and its
essive or lative nature are gathered from the meaning of the verb and the spatial region
named.
2.2
Case relators
A case relator is an expression fulfilling the function of Y in the construction shown in Diagram 2.
Diagram 2 Construction of a case relator
X
↓
Y
↓
Z
unit modified
case relator
NP
If the construction is syntactic and compositional, Y governs Z and forms a constituent with it.
If Y is an adposition, this constituent is an adpositional phrase; if Y is a case affix, YZ is a
cased NP. The syntagma YZ, in turn, is capable of modifying X, whether or not X actually
governs it. We will here concentrate on such constructions, disregarding cases in which X and
Y form a constituent, as in preverbation (s. Hagège 2010:62-67). It is the combinatory potential of the case relator which brings this subordinative relation of Z to X about. The two
arrows of Diagram 2 therefore symbolize not only the dependency relations, but also Y’s relationality.
In the simplest case, the case relator Y is a monomorphemic formative. E3 illustrates this
basic construction; Diagram 3 is its formal representation.
E3
CASTIL.
tornaronse a su celada (Libro de los buenos proverbios que dijeron los filósofos y
sabios antiguos [1250], §5)7
‘they turned back to their ambush’
Diagram 3 Construction with simple case relator
tornaronse
↓
a
7
unit modified
case relator
Corpus examples are provided with a bracketed year indicating the known or assumed production
date of the text. All Spanish texts are quoted according to the online Corpus Diacrónico del Español
(CORDE) of the Real Academia Española, with occasional emendations.
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
tornaronse
↓
su celada
5
unit modified
NP
This paper will be concerned with the question of how elements filling the position of Y in
Diagram 2 are formed in the history from Latin to Castilian.
2.3
Prepositional adverbs
The most treated types of case relators are cases and adpositions. The latter, however, have a
subtype which will be focused in what follows, called adpositional adverb. Since in Latin and
Romance, adpositions are prepositions, the traditional term prepositional adverb serves us
best here.8 Latin circa ‘around, near’ is a typical example of this class. Since its meaning is
based on a spatial region, thus a relational concept, it presupposes a landmark which the
superordinate referent or situation is close to. There are two alternative constructions corresponding to this meaning: Either the landmark is expressed, as in E4. Then it takes the form of
a complement NP with which the prepositional adverb forms a prepositional phrase. Semantically, this complement fills the semantic argument position of the case relator.
E4
LATIN
circa frontem intentae uenae mouentur (Cels. Med. [~30] 2, 2, 3)
‘around the forehead, the veins move tensed’
Or else the landmark is not expressed. Then the semantic argument position is filled by a referent which is either given in the context, as in E5, or is in the speech situation, in which case
circa means ‘near the speaker’, as in E10 below.
E5
LATIN
ea quae circa sunt (Cels. Med. [~30] 5, 28, 14e)
‘that which is around [the carcinoma]’
In other words, a prepositional adverb is a preposition with an optional complement. Most of
the local prepositions of Latin and Castilian are, in fact, prepositional adverbs. From a structural point of view, the prepositional construction is more complex than the adverbial
construction, so the latter might appear to be basic, and the former, an optional extension. On
the other hand, the concept designated is, at any rate, relational in all uses. From a semantic
point of view, having to look for the relatum outside the construction is a complication. We
will therefore refrain from discussing the question of the systematic priority of prepositional
and adverbial use of a prepositional adverb.
3
Prehistory of Romance prepositions
In order to understand the role of prepositions in the grammar of Romance languages, it is
profitable to consider their diachronic background. Latin had inherited from Proto-Indo-European a suffixal case system. It had not, however, inherited any relevant set of postpositions or
8
The term denotes this concept at least since Delbrück’s comparative syntax of Indo-European languages (1897); cf. also Hagège 2010:53. In German linguistics of German, the term
Präpositionaladverb denotes something different, viz. an adverb formed in a regular way by univerba tion of a construction of a preposition taking an inanimate pronominal complement which latter,
however, is typically coded as one of the adverbs da ‘there’ and wo ‘where’ and precedes the preposition, as in damit ‘with it’. An alternate and better term for this form class is Pronominaladverb
‘pronominal adverb’.
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
6
strategies to productively form these.9 As a result, there was nothing to feed the case system
(by grammaticalization), so it was doomed to disappear one day.
This regards, specifically, the local cases. Latin had inherited local cases for the essive,
allative and ablative relation, although these were already on the decline at the beginning of
the documented history. The perlative relation was always coded by adpositions. The lative
relations are marked against the essive relation; and among the lative relations, the ablative is
marked as against the allative (Bourdin 1997). A subset of spatial prepositions comprising in
‘in’, sub ‘under’ and super ‘above’ combines with one case for the essive and another case for
the allative relation. There is, for such prepositions, no case to combine with for the ablative
relation. This must be coded by an additional ablative preposition, as will be seen in §7.1.2 (s.
also Luraghi 2010:39-41).
Latin had inherited a large set of prepositions, most of which were monomorphemic and
therefore provided no model for the analogical formation of more prepositions. The majority
stems from Indo-European adverbs which secondarily acquired government. As a result, the
language possesses three classes of words which function as adverbs and/or prepositions:
(1) one class of words which function only as adverbs, including foris ‘outside (essive), from
outside’, foras ‘outside (allative)’10 and many others;
(2) another class which only functions as prepositions, including a subset which survives in
Romance as primary prepositions, notably ad, contra, cum, de, in, inter, per ~ pro, sine,
sub, versus, and another subset whose use as words is limited to latinity, viz. ab, apud,
cis, ex, erga, ob, penes, prae, praeter, prope, propter;11
(3) and a third class, the prepositional adverbs, which include ante ‘before’, circa ~ circum
‘around, near’, extra ‘without’, intra ‘within’, post ‘after’, super ~ supra ‘above’, ultra
‘beyond’ and many others (cf. Ricca 2010:177-181).
As will be seen in subsequent sections, class #3 will remain most productive throughout the
history of the language up to the end of the middle ages.
4
Preposition and case government
In the simplest case, a case relator governs a naked NP, as in E3. However, case relators are
continually replaced and renewed in all languages. Since the Latin case suffixes could not be
renewed, they were replaced by prepositions. Now a spatial relation may be functionally complex, so that it is coded by more than one formative. This is especially true of newly formed
relators: they may be composed of a formative representing the semantic core and other formatives which merely indicate the dependency structure. This also applies when the system of
case relators is renewed by prepositions which are superimposed on an existent system of case
suffixes: The prepositions combine syntagmatically with case suffixes, the former providing
the semantic core, the latter the structural link for the complex case relator. As a result, a case
9
The set of denominal Classical Latin postpositions comprises causa ‘because of’ and gratia ‘in favor
of’. Neither of them ever made it into the colloquial variety.
10
These two are used as prepositions from the Vulgate [390] onwards.
11
Ab is confused with ad, on the one hand, and with ex, on the other, in Middle Latin texts.
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
7
relator X governs its complement Z via another case relator Y.12 The governed constituent YZ
is then a cased NP, as in E6.
E6
LATIN
ut inprovidum ad insidias praeda perduceret. (Curtius Rufus, Historiae Alexandri
Magni [1st cent. AD] 8, 1, 4, 7)
‘that the booty would lead the imprudent into the ambush.’
Whenever the case suffix in such a combination does not vary, the preposition governs the
case, as in E6. In such a constellation, the case becomes redundant. While the case system is
reduced, verbs no longer govern cases and instead prepositions. From the language stage of
Cicero’s letters [1st cent. BC], case government is increasingly replaced by prepositional government.
As mentioned in §3, there is, from Proto-Indo-European times, a small set of spatial
prepositions which, depending on the essive vs. allative relation, combine with either the ablative or the accusative case. As the case system falls into disuse, this distinction gets lost, and
the two cases are found promiscue with many other prepositions, too. The same applies to
adverbs which may replace a prepositional phrase in its function as local complement or
adjunct. Some Latin adverbs code the distinction between rest and motion by what earlier was
a case ending. However, grammarians complain, for instance in E7, that this distinction is not
observed.
E7
LATIN
fiunt soloecismi … ut … intro sum pro intus sum, et foris exeo pro foras.
(Donatus, Ars grammatica [353], De Soloecismo)
‘solecisms are made like ‘I am into’ instead of ‘I am inside’, and ‘I go outside’
instead of ‘out’.’
To be sure, Latin or Proto-Romance speakers of the fourth century cannot be expected to
associate any function with such submorphemic units as -o, -us, -is and -as. What matters is
that they apparently do not expect a local relation to be coded by a preposition or adverb designating a spatial region. They have legitimate inherited models of spatial adverbs which are
compatible with any local relation, like intus ‘on the inside, to the inside, from within’ and
peregre ‘(from) abroad, i.e. in/to/from foreign countries’.
The thing to be kept in mind here is the following: A local relation – specifically, rest vs.
allative, ablative and perlative motion – between a verb and a nominal or adverbial constituent
designating the landmark may be coded on the verb or on the dependent (or on both). Latin
had inherited from Proto-Indo-European a pronounced preference for dependent marking.
However, in the case of the local relations in question, this principle is not easily maintained
in a consistent way, since the features in question are part of the lexical meaning of the verb,
anyway. This leads, on the one hand, to double coding both as a feature of the meaning of the
verb and by some case relator associated with the dependent. On the other hand, given major
stability of the lexical meaning, additional coding by a case relator may be perceived as superfluous.13
12
This configuration of a preposition and a case affix is considered a word in much of French struc turalism and still in Hagège 2010:38. This analysis is not adopted here, since considering ad ... -as a
word in ad insidias makes it impossible to consider insidias a word, which latter is more in consonance with linguistic tradition and common-sense.
This was the standpoint of the grammarian Pompeius [5 th cent.] (Keil V 248): Quando [intus et
foris] significent ‘in loco’, quando ‘de loco’, noli de ipsis intellegere – ambigua enim sunt et incerta;
sed collige de verbis coniunctis. ‘When intus and foris mean ‘at a place’ and when they mean ‘from a
place’ don’t expect to understand from themselves – for they are ambiguous and uncertain; instead
13
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
8
At the same time, whenever there is no superordinate verb to convey the local relation,
there is a need for more autonomous prepositions and adverbs which identify the local relation. These will be reviewed in the next sections.
5
Formation of adpositions
Among the various processes of forming new lexemes, compounding must be distinguished
from univerbation:
• Compounding is a process of word formation, thus of the language system. It forms a
stem by combination of two stems. The underlying rules are oriented towards the target
category and sensitive to properties of the component stems, whose combination follows
a pattern. Compounds do not originate in syntactic constructions (but may bear paradigmatic relations to them). Example: Engl. northeast.
• Univerbation is a process happening in discourse. It welds two words that are adjacent in
discourse into one word, which is lexicalized and thus joins the system. Their union is
independent from grammatical structure, i.e. it respects neither the categories of the components nor the syntagmatic relation – if any – between them, but is entirely based on
their semantic relatedness and regular adjacency in discourse. Therefore, univerbations
presuppose syntactic constructions (but disregard their structure). Example: Engl. nonetheless.
The set of primary case relators may be expanded by the formation of complex adpositions. 14
The afore-mentioned two linguistic processes also apply to adpositions:
(1) Compounding creates new adpositions from relational elements according to categorial
patterns at the level of the stem. The traditional term ‘compound preposition’ for formations such as Late Latin abante ‘(from) in front’ implies that they are indeed the product
of rules of word formation.
(2) Rules of syntax create phrases deploying relational elements, and the resulting sequences
are then univerbated and lexicalized as adpositions. While the syntactic construction is
compositional, univerbation may disregard and destroy it.
In either case, the question is what these relational elements can be. Apart from deadverbial
adpositions, which will be our main object of discussion further below, adpositions may be of
denominal or deverbal origin. Denominal adpositions are based on semantically relational
nouns, typically denoting spatial regions like top and front, but also abstract concepts such as
cause and consequence. The noun governs the landmark Z, typically via a genitive case relator. This prepositional phrase is, in turn, adjoined to its dependency controller by another case
relator – typically, one of local function. The combination then has the relationality of Y
shown in Diagram 2. E8 is a typical example.
gather it from the verbs they combine with.’
14
It is worth noting that only such a dynamic view on the composition of a word class can do justice
to its heterogeneity and its functioning in synchrony and diachrony. Kailuweit 2001:34-46 provides a
report on various structuralist (incl. generativist) approaches to prepositions contradicting each other
by including and excluding subclasses of prepositions which differ in their degree of complexity and
grammaticalization. At the same time, structuralism is not incompatible with the appropriate conception of prepositions as a class between lexicon and grammar, witness Rubio 1966:165-171.
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
E8
LATIN
9
una vinea in fronte de Rodmella (Sometimiento del monasterio de San Clemente
de Rivarredonda a San Millán [1037])
‘a vineyard opposite Rodmella’
E8 features the latinized counterpart of the Castilian complex preposition en frente de ‘in front
of, opposite’, the latter attested only since 1400. This strategy, highly productive in many languages all over the globe, plays a very minor role in Latin (two examples in Väänänen 1967,
§202), since Latin lacks relational nouns designating spatial regions (Lehmann 1998). It has
become productive more recently in the Romance languages.
Deverbal adpositions are mostly based on non-finite verb forms, since these are made to
modify the main predicate or one of its dependents. The underlying verb is typically bivalent,
so its complement becomes the landmark Z of Diagram 2. If it is monovalent, its subject may
form the complement in an absolute construction, as in E9.
E9
LATIN
habeat medietatem praefatae haereditatis, excepto solare et horto. (Concilium
legionense [1170])
‘he may have half of the afore-mentioned inheritance, except the plot and the
garden’
Formation of adpositions based on non-finite verbs is common in many languages and is
found to some extent in European languages (Kortmann & König 1992), but is used only
exceptionally in Latin and not much more in the Romance languages. 15 There are also very
few examples of Romance adpositions based on finite verb forms like Span. hace ‘ago’, pese
‘despite’. All the rest are based on adverbs and prepositions.
The following description pursues the hypothesis that Latin-Romance complex prepositions based on adverbs and prepositions are due not to compounding, but to univerbation. This
implies nothing for the denominal and deverbal adpositions mentioned before. On the contrary, there are liable to exist rules of word formation for the former type.
6
Formation of prepositional adverbs
6.1
Optional complements
As noted in §3, Latin has subclasses of case relators which function exclusively as prepositions and exclusively as adverbs, resp. However, in Latin as in Romance, it is the
prepositional adverb which has a key position both in the syntax of prepositions and in their
formation. In a language which possesses a productive class of adpositional adverbs, the question of the diachronic priority of the adverbial or the adpositional use of a new prepositional
adverb does not apply. As soon as a semantically relational lexeme is recruited to code a relation towards some landmark, the alternative of expressing or not expressing this landmark is
available. For many prepositional adverbs in the Latin-Romance history, the earliest record of
prepositional use and the earliest record of adverbial use are only a few decades apart and in
either order, which allows the inference that they became available simultaneously.
This close connection between adverbs and prepositions survives in the Romance languages to this day. Taking up examples E4 and E5, we observe that the adverbial and
prepositional uses of Castilian cerca continue seamlessly the double use in Latin. E10 shows
adverbial use, E11 continues the Latin prepositional use with loss of case government.
15
Typologically equally common, but in principle unavailable to Latin and Romance, is the grammaticalization of coverbs to adpositions (Hagège 2010, ch. 3.4.4.1, Lehmann 2015, ch. 3.4.1.7).
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
10
E10
CASTIL.
cerca viene el plazo (Cantar de Mío Cid [1140], tirada 11)
‘the date is coming near’
E11
CASTIL.
lidiamos cerca Valencia (Cantar de Mío Cid [1140], tirada 143)
‘we fought near Valencia’
E12
bien cerca del agua, a todos sos varones mandó fazer una cárcava (Cantar de Mío
Cid [1140], tirada 27)
‘very close to the water he commanded all his men to make a moat’
CASTIL.
E12 displays a new feature: the adverb is combined with a complement by means of a case
relator. This will be analyzed in §6.2.
Outside the classical variety of Latin, there is a tendency to homogenize the class of case
relators. One strategy is to use pure adverbs also as prepositions. Thus, what in Classical Latin
is the adverb intro ‘inside’ is used as a preposition in E13.
E13
LATIN
et statim ingreditur intro spelunca et de intro cancellos primum dicet orationem
(Itin. [384] 24, 2)
‘and at once he steps into the cave and from behind the grill he first says a prayer’
Although case government by prepositions obviously does not work any more at the stage of
the language represented by E13, the erstwhile adverb combines directly with its nominal
complement. The same happens with some other words which in Classical Latin are adverbs
and are used as plain prepositions in Late Latin, including intus, subtus, simul, palam, retro,
foras, foris (Hamp 1888:325). This strategy is soon to come to an end.
6.2
Relationalization
The much more productive alternative is to combine an adverb with a primary preposition
whose task it is to code the dependency of the complement, as shown in Diagram 4.
Diagram 4 Relationalization
[ XAdv YPrim. Prep ]Prep
Y in this function will be called a relationalizer. In E14, de does this service for foris.
E14
LATIN
qui voluerit stare in suo horto, et sua almunia foris de illa alcudina (Pactos entre
Alfonso el Batallador y los moros de Tudela [1115], §3)
‘he who wants to stay in his garden and his cottage outside the borough’
Just like case government is diachronically replaced by prepositional government where it is
determined by verbs, so it is replaced where the governing item is a preposition. One may say
that circa in E4 takes a complement marked by the accusative just like acerca en E27 below
takes a complement marked by de.
The power of relationalization may also be seen in the phenomenon that erstwhile plain
prepositions start being relationalized, as if they were basically adverbs. Ante ‘before, in front’
keeps being used as a preposition from the earliest Castilian documents, as in E15. At the
same time, it is treated as an adverb, involving intercalation of de in a prepositional construction, as in E16.16
16
Since 1102, the variant antes de ‘before’ is documented, which is to replace ante de.
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
E15
CASTIL.
alia terra que dicunt la Toua ante el molino de don Didago (Carta de donación
[1127], §29)
‘another lot called la Tova, in front of the mill of Don Diego’
E16
CASTIL.
que ante de la mala fecta lo conpró (Fueros de Medinaceli [1129], §35)
‘that he bought it before the evil dead’
11
A preposition taking its complement directly, as ante in E15, will be called a plain preposition. A preposition taking its complement by means of a relationalizer, like ante in E16, will
be called a relationalized preposition. Other examples include the Latin prepositions trans
‘beyond’ and ex ‘out of’. In their expanded forms detras and deex, they take the relationalizer
de in Castilian; and tras ‘in back’ is also used as an adverb. The conversion of plain prepositions into relationalized prepositions testifies to the productivity of the pattern of Diagram 4.
The set of primary prepositions used as relationalizers is very small, essentially comprising Latin de, ad and con. Their use varies somewhat among the Romance languages. In IberoRomance, it is mostly de, as will be seen in the bulk of the examples of §7.1.3. Thus, the same
primary case relator is chosen which replaces the Latin genitive, as if the prepositional adverb
were denominal in origin. For instance, the adverb ante is constructed like the combination of
preposition and relational noun in fronte of E8. A two-level principle appears to be at work
here. First, complex prepositions govern their complement not directly, but by means of a primary preposition which serves as a relationalizer. Second, the relationalizer de, which is
motivated for denominal prepositions, is generalized over secondary prepositions of whatever
origin.
This paradigmatic relationship between [Y]Adv and [Y de]Prep is attested at least since the
th
11 century and in the sequel becomes the most regular pattern for the formation of complex
prepositions. In other words, most Castilian prepositional adverbs are relationalized by de.
Putting and omitting the relationalizer switches between the categories of preposition and
adverb. This is a syntactically regular relationship, and components adjacent in one of the two
cases – viz. the prepositional adverb and the relationalizer – are therefore not prone to univerbation. The one exception to this will be analyzed in §7.3. In general, however, it is not clear
that a combination like detrás de is a lexical unit (as assumed in Lehmann 2002, §3.2.1). The
more appropriate analysis is probably that detrás governs its complement in the genitive, i.e.
via the “functional” preposition de (as in Fagard & De Mulder 2007:11).
7
Superordinate prepositions
7.1
Prepositional adverb from primary preposition plus prepositional adverb
7.1.1
Semantosyntactic motivation
Spatial adverbs like Latin supra ‘above’, extra ‘outside’ etc. involve a spatial region. In ProtoIndo-European and Early Latin, a spatial adverb was like a cased NP in incorporating, in addition, a superordinate local relation. Thus, foras is, etymologically, a combination of for‘region outside’ with an allative suffix; so it means ‘out(wards)’ (s. §4). This, however, does
not work any longer in Late Latin and Romance. These languages code the local relation
towards the spatial region either in the lexical meaning of the verb or by a local relator, viz. a
primary local preposition. They consequently add such a local relator in front of adverbs
which never coded any local relation, like intus and peregre.
Throughout Latin-Romance history, prepositional adverbs are again and again reinforced.
The most productive pattern is the combination of an initial primary preposition X with an
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
12
existent prepositional adverb Y, as shown in Diagram 5 and illustrated by desuper ‘from
above’.
Diagram 5 Reinforcement of prepositional adverb
[ XPrim.Prep. YPrep.Adv. ]Prep.Adv.
The preposition taking the position of X in the pattern will be called superordinate preposition. The combination, however, is not a morphological process. Initially, this construction is
motivated in the way described in §2.1. Accordingly, if there is a complement Z, the phrase
has the syntactic structure shown in Diagram 6.
Diagram 6 Superordinate prepositional construction
[ XPrim.Prep [ YPrep.Adv. ZNP ]PrepP ]
The meaning of the construction is, consequently: ‘in the local relation X to the spatial region
Y of landmark Z’. For instance in (undated) E17, the meaning of the prepositional phrase may
be circumscribed by ‘from (X) the region in front of (Y) his eyes (Z)’.
E17
LATIN
hunc ab ante oculis parentis rapuerunt nymphae in gurgite (Gruter, Inscriptiones
antiquae totius orbis Romani, 717, 9)
‘this [child] was robbed before his father’s eyes by nymphs in a whirlpool’
However, this semantic function is most often lost in the further course of things. The syntactic boundary between X and Y is dropped – Fagard 2006, §3.2.3 assumes reanalysis here –,
the sequence XY is univerbated, and the result is a mere formal reinforcement of Y. This will
be illustrated in some detail for the preposition ante ‘before’, which may serve as a specimen
of many other spatial prepositions.
7.1.2
Latin
From the beginning of the history, there is in Latin a small set of items of the structure shown
in Diagram 5, including forms like incircum ‘around’, insuper ‘on top’ and combinations with
the idiosyncratic prepositional adverb usque ‘all the way to/from a spatial or temporal limit’,
which caused much headache to ancient grammarians. By far the majority of this type of complex preposition are formed in Vulgar and Late Latin.17 The prepositional adverb ante is found
preceded by ab, ad, de, ex, in and sub as superordinate prepositions (Hamp 1888:335). E18
illustrates in ante ‘forward’ as a local adverb, E19 (several centuries later) illustrates its use as
a temporal adverb ‘onwards’. The preposition ab ante ‘from the front of’, already seen in
E17, is shown by E20. The ancient grammarians insist that specification of the local relation
by such an additional preposition is not only ungrammatical, but – in the latter example –
superfluous, too.18
E18
LATIN
17
18
quantum denuo in ante ibant, tantum denuo retro revertebantur (Itin. [384] 7, 3)
‘as much as they went forward again, so much they returned back again’
(Harrington 1997:32)
Hamp 1888 offers a rather complete list.
Placidi Glossae, p. 6: Ante me fugit dicimus, non abante. ‘We say “he flees before me”, not “from
before [me]”’.
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
E19
LATIN
E20
LATIN
13
Et ideo ab odie in ante firmamus perpetualiter nostra supra nominata offertione
(Cartulario de San Millán [1045])
‘And therefore we grant from today onwards for ever our above-mentioned offer’
et absconderunt se Adam et mulier eius abante faciem domini dei (Itala [~300],
Gen. 3, 8)
‘and Adam and his wife hid from the face of the Lord God’
Initially, this construction is motivated in the way described in §7.1.1. This explains why the
set of items functioning as superordinate preposition in the pattern essentially reduces to ab,
de, ad, in and occasionally per: these are the prepositions which signify local relations. Further, as de gradually ousts ab and ex (Luraghi 2010:36, Adams 2013:609), it becomes the
most frequent superordinate preposition in this construction. The semantosyntactic motivation
is also visible in temporal prepositions, as in E21.
E21
LATIN
de post cuius morte fili superstites numero V et nepotes X tenfrsi [i.e. teneri] sunt
(CIL 8, 9162 [188])
‘since whose death five children and ten tender grandchildren are left’
The initial motivation, however, is frequently lost in the course of the lexicalization of these
complex prepositions. For instance, a grammarian observes that “those who speak badly” say
things like E22,
E22
LATIN
depost illum ambulat (Pompeius, In artem Donati [~500], Keil V 273, 25)
‘she walks after him’
where de is indeed misplaced from an etymological point of view. Similarly, in the meaning
of E23, no ablative relation is discernible, and de does nothing but reinforce the prepositional
adverb ante.
E23
LATIN
ubi missa facta fuerit de ante Cruce (Itin. [384] 37, 8)
‘when the mass was completed before the Cross’ (Harrington 1997:29)
The same holds for adverbial use, as shown by E24.
E24
LATIN
stulti, nonne qui fecit quod de foris est, etiam id quod de intus est fecit? (Vulgate
[390] Luke 11, 40)
‘ye fools, did not he who made which is without, make that which is within, too?’
In cases like E24, the ablative preposition is a faithful rendering of the Greek original, which
has tò éksōthen (DEF:ACC.N.SG without:ABL) and tò ésōthen (DEF:ACC.N.SG within:ABL). The
pattern, however, is already productive at the time (cf. E2). There are a number of forces in
the diachrony of Latin grammar to conspire to the effect that an ablative expression loses the
ablative semantic feature so that a mere essive relation remains (Luraghi 2010:26f). Therefore, the superposed preposition soon ends up in a mere reinforcement of the basic
prepositional adverb.
After univerbation, the structural appearance of the erstwhile superordinate preposition is
that of a prefix. And indeed, from Hamp 1888:327-330 to Fagard 2006, §3.2.3, analysts have
applied the terms ‘prefix’ and ‘prefixation’ to the formations here under analysis. It is, however, important to put this into diachronic perspective, as also noted by Fagard l.c. The genesis
of the construction is no process of prefixation – thus, no process of word formation. The historical evidence of the original constructions leaves no doubt that these complex prepositions
originate in univerbation of adjacent sequences in erstwhile syntactic constructions. This does
not, of course, exclude the possibility that, at a subsequent point in diachrony, a set of univer-
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
14
bations of the same structure constituted a model for the formation of further complex prepositions. It is, however, not clear whether such an assumption is actually needed.
7.1.3
Castilian
The superposition of a primary local preposition on a basic prepositional adverb is very productive in Castilian from the beginning of the documented history. In this respect, there is in
medieval northern Iberia perfect continuity between the grammar of documents composed in
Latin and of documents composed in Old Castilian. Comparing the example series of E25 –
E27 below with E10 – E12 above, we observe that the prepositional adverb has been reinforced by the superordinate allative preposition a. E25 and E26 illustrate adverbial use, the
difference between them being that the landmark is in the context in the case of E25, where a
hillock is mentioned in the preceding sentence, while it is the speech situation in E26.
E25
CASTIL.
acerca corre Salón (Cantar de Mío Cid [1140] p. 135, §26)
‘nearby flows the Jalón river’
E26
CASTIL.
el plazo viene acerca (Mío Cid p. 122)
‘the date is coming near’
The adverbial construction is thus, identical to the Latin one. In E27, acerca is combined with
the relationalizer de (s. Diagram 4) in order to take a complement. In this prepositional construction, the only difference from Latin is that the dependency relation of the complement is
signalled by a preposition instead of a case suffix or – in Late and Vulgar Latin – nothing.
E27
CASTIL.
estavan acerca de ellos (Libro de los buenos proverbios que dijeron los filósofos y
sabios antiguos [1250], §5)
‘they stood close to them’
If the combination of the superordinate preposition, the basic prepositional adverb and the
structural case relator were formed by rules of syntax, then the highest syntactic boundary
would be after the superordinate preposition, as indicated in Diagram 6; and de would form a
constituent with the dependent NP. Instead, the superordinate preposition is univerbated with
the basic prepositional adverb and lexicalized as acerca.
We now throw a glance at the productivity of formations composed of a superordinate
preposition and a prepositional adverb. The Latin prepositional adverb ante will again serve
as a specimen to represent the set of local prepositions. We saw in E15f that ante keeps being
used as such in Castilian. On its way to modern Castilian, it acquires a causal sense, ‘in view
of’. However, already in Late Latin, it was reinforced by superordinate prepositions, as seen
in §7.1.2. Of those various formations, only abante, deante and inante survive in Castilian.
As was seen in E20f, abante is a Latin formation. It soon acquires a variant avante, which
is conserved with the meaning ‘before’ in Italian and French. In Castilian, abante initially survives as a minor orthographic variant of avante. The latter appears, with the meaning
‘hereafter’, in a Latin notarial text of 943. In the following centuries, the two variants are used
as an adverb with varying senses, as ‘in front’, ‘forward’, ‘hereafter’ and ‘above (in the text)’.
A text of 1380-85 appears to contain the only occurrence of the preposition avante de ‘in front
of’. The adverb avante is used to this day with the meaning ‘forward’.
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
15
Avante is reinforced by the superordinate preposition de to yield the prepositional adverb
devant ‘before, in front (of)’.19 Both the adverb (E28) and the preposition (E29) can be reinforced by an additional superordinate preposition.
E28
CASTIL.
de un año in devant vendat sua casa (Fuero de Carcastillo [1129], §1)
‘one year ahead may he sell his house’
E29
CASTIL.
dent fidiatore cum testimonias per devant rege, & devant alcaldes (o.c. §3)
‘let them provide a guarantor with witnesses in front of the king and before the
mayors’
Two tokens of an expanded variant adevant of the adverb are documented, with the meanings
‘to the front’ [1129] and ‘hereafter’ [1396]. There are also isolated examples of the relationalized preposition devant de. After 1600, devant is no longer used in Castilian.
The preposition de ante is found in Latin texts of Castile from 913 on.20 It appears as an
adverb in Castilian texts from 1250 on. Occasionally, it is also used with ablative sense, as in
E30.
E30
CASTIL.
fuxo Caím de ante la faz de Dios (Alfonso X, General Estoria [1275], §XII)
‘Cain fled from god’s face’
The semantosyntactic context is the same of E20 (cf. also fn. 12), so that avante might be
expected. However, by the time of the document of E30, avante had forfeited all of its ablative force; so a different superordinate preposition was necessary. Nevertheless, both the
preposition and the adverb de ante become obsolete until 1600.
The Latin adverb in ante seen in E18 is continued by Castil. enante21 ‘before’ (E31),
which is also used as a preposition (E32) and a conjunction.
E31
CASTIL.
E32
CASTIL.
en dia de Sancti Michael o el domingo enante. (Fuero de Cáceres [1234-1275],
§451)
‘on St. Michael’s day or the preceding Sunday.’
que las desuelen enante de la tela (Abraham de Toledo, Libro de los animales que
cazan [1250], folio 32 r)
‘that they flay them in front of the membrane’
Unexpanded occurrences of enante end in 1509. It is reinforced by superordinate de to yield
denante. This must have happened before Romance writing, because denante is documented
as a preposition (E33) as early as 950, and several decades later as an adverb (E34).
E33
Castilian
ke denante ela sua face gaudioso segamus (Glosas Emilianenses [950], folio 72 r)
‘that we keep [living] in joy in front of his face’
E34
plus denante in ripa una serna (Cartulario de San Millán de la Cogolla [1027], p.
106)
‘further on the river bank, a field’
LATIN
After this time, denante is only used as an adverb, also as the opposite of después ‘afterwards’. The (relatively) unexpanded form appears last in literary texts of the 19 th century.
19
It also appears in the compound devandicho ‘above-mentioned’ (Colección Diplomática del Monasterio de Carrizo [1283]).
20
In Castilian texts, de ante also appears as an attribute, like día de ante ‘day before’.
21
It also survives in Italian innante > innanzi.
16
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
From then on, only the expanded form en denante ‘a moment ago’ is used, which itself is very
rare.
The rarity of denante and of its reinforcement is due to the upcoming of the (probably dissimilative) phonological variant delante,22 which continually gains ground against its source.
Mere delante is first documented as an adverb in a Late Latin text (E35), and later as a preposition, both plain and relationalized (E36):
E35
LATIN
E36
CASTIL.
ut nullus homo vivens ingrediatur de Pumar delante, (Fueros y privilegios de
Santa María del Puerto [1042], §11)
‘that no living man shall enter from Pumar onward,’
delante su mugier e de sus fijas querié tener las armas (Cantar de Mío Cid [1140],
n° 86)
‘in front of his wife and his daughters did he want to hold the tournament’
The expansion ad delante ‘further on’ is attested even earlier than its base, in a Latin notarial
document of 913. The further expansion en adelante ‘hereafter’ comes later, as shown by E37.
E37
LATIN
et quantum habetis ibi laborato, ẽ adelante poteritis ibi examplare, & laborare,
(Fuero de Carcastillo en Navarra [1129], §2)
‘and whatever you have cultivated there, you may extend and cultivate there,’
Another early expansion is en delante, attested as an adverb in Alfonso X’s Fuero Real [125155] and practically only used in the formula de X en delante ‘from X onwards’. As a relationalized preposition, it is extremely rare and first found in a letter [1315] of the Documentos de
la catedral de León. Apart from a few isolated latecomers, en delante falls into disuse at the
beginning of the 17th century.
Por delante is found as an adverb from 1264 on, as a plain preposition in a story from
1300-1325, and as a relationalized preposition in the Crónica del rey don Pedro [1400] by
Pero López de Ayala. Both adverbial and prepositional use are highly frequent to this day.
Diagram 7 Timeline of prepositions based on ante
0
ante
250
500
750
1000
1250
1500
1750
2000
in ante
denante
en denante
delante
adelante
en adelante
en delante
por delante
ab ante
devant
adevant
de ante
Diagram 7 presents the Latin-Castilian prepositions based on ante on a single timeline. The
development may be summarized as follows:
22
Theoretically, one might consider an etymology *de illo ante ‘from the front’ (cf. French au-dessus
‘above’ < à le dessus). However, it would presuppose a substantivization of the prepositional adverb
which has no parallel in the formation of Castilian prepositional adverbs.
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
•
•
•
•
17
Of the complex prepositions formed in antiquity, three (de ante, in ante, ab ante) survive
into Old Castilian.
In the period preceding the first Castilian documents, one of these (enante) was twice
expanded by a superordinate preposition (denante, adelante).
There is a flood of further expansions roughly from 1100 on, i.e. when Castilian started
being regularly used in writing.
Some of the intermediate products fall into disuse after a few centuries; and with one
exception, no new expanded preposition based on ante is formed after 1300.
The other spatial prepositional adverbs are just a little less productive than ante. From Latin
post ‘after’, we get in post, de post > de pues, de ex post > después and por después. Once the
Latin preposition trans ‘beyond’ is recategorized as a prepositional adverb, we get ad trans >
atrás, de trans > detrás and por detrás. The story of these and many other complex prepositions is largely analogous to the story of our specimen ante.
From all of this, one may conclude that the vigor of the strategy of forming new prepositional adverbs by univerbation essentially came to an end with the middle age. It seems
probable that, since then, denominal and deverbal prepositions have been taking over.
7.2
Adverb from primary preposition plus adverb
7.2.1
Informative and redundant combinations
At a general level, the formation of adverbs and prepositions by combination with a superordinate preposition is the same process analyzed in §7.1 for prepositional adverbs. §§7.2f only
serve to show that this process does, indeed, apply to the other two subclasses of case relators
mentioned in §3. As seen in §2.1, a preposition may combine with a nominal complement, as
in E38, or an adverbial complement, as in E39.
E38
LATIN
Inter eos dies … in comitium producebantur, (Gellius, Noctes Atticae [170] 20, 1,
47)
‘During these days … they were led to the assembly square,’
E39
LATIN
Interibi hic miles forte Athenas advenit, (Pl. Mil. [-200] 104)
‘In the meantime this soldier happened to arrive in Athens,’
Just like those based on prepositional adverbs, combinations such as interibi of E39 are
unproductive in literary Latin. Most of them differ from this example in being pleonastic:
words like abhinc ‘from here’ and deinde ‘thence’ combine an ablative preposition with an
ablative adverb, inibi ‘just there’ combines an essive preposition with an essive adverb. Both
the informative and the pleonastic subtype become ever more productive in the following centuries. E40 is an example of the former.
E40
LATIN
Sicque ex tunc uetitum est sacerdotibus conjungia sortire. (Crónica rotense [880])
‘And thus, since that time, it is forbidden for priests to take wives.’
Again as with prepositional adverbs, what starts out as the specification of a local relation
ends up as a mere reinforcement. Thus, on its first occurrence in the literature (E41), a foris
means ‘from outside’. However, no ablative force is involved in E42.
E41
LATIN
in ulcus penetrat omnis iniuria a foris (Plin. nat. hist. [77] 17, 90, 227)
‘every misdemeanour applied from outside penetrates into an abscess’
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
E42
LATIN
18
et bituminabis eam ab intus et a foris (Itala [~300] Gen. 6, 14)
‘you will caulk it [the ark] inside and out’ (Harrington 1997:28)
The same holds for combinations with superordinate de. In E43, #a shows de foris in ablative
sense, #b shows it in essive sense, and #c even shows it in allative sense.
E43 a.
LATIN
si quis de foris venerit (Jre. Reg. Pach. 146)
‘if anybody came from outside’ (Harrington 1997:29)
b.
sed sicut sum de foris, ita sum deintus (Vitae Patr. 3, 92)
‘but as I am outside, so I am within’ (Harrington 1997:29)
c.
lumen autem de foris non affertur, sed de spelunca interiori eicitur (Itin. [384] 24,
4)
‘the light is not brought outdoors, but is emitted from inside the cave’
The same generic series of events repeats itself in Castilian. E44 shows the meaningful combination of an adverb designating a spatial region with a superordinate case relator. At the
same time, it provides evidence of asemantic variation of the case relator. Again, no ablative
force is visible in E45.
E44
CASTIL.
E45
CASTIL.
7.2.2
intra corsseras de Nagara, scilicet de arenales ad intus, ... et de valle antiquo
insursum, et de illa cruce de Sancta Eugenia in intus, (Fuero de Nájera [10201076], §1)
‘within the borders of Nájera, i.e., from the sandy areas inwards … and from the
ancient valley upwards, and from the cross of St. Eugenia inwards’
nisi laborare tantum in illo azore de illo castello de foris (o.c. §2)
‘except to work only in the wall of that castle at the outside [i.e. at the outer side
of the wall]’
The attrition of the ablative
The great majority of examples of a superordinate preposition ending up in a mere reinforcement involve ablative prepositions. The essive and allative relations to prepositional and
adverbial phrases have less need to be renewed or reinforced, because they are generally
inherent in the superordinate verb. It is the ablative relation which requires separate expression.23 In Old and Classical Latin, this is afforded by the preposition ab. As mentioned in
§7.1.3, where it appears in Castilian, it lacks any ablative meaning. From Vulgar Latin on, ab
(like ex) is replaced by de. On the one hand, this preposition has, in the past two millenia,
become a semantically empty case marker which just mediates dependency of a nominal
expression from anything unable to directly govern it, losing by consequence its original ablative force. On the other hand, the language possesses no other local relator to signal an
ablative relation. De is used again and again to provide its immediate dependent with an ablative relation, and it again and again loses this function and becomes a mere submorphemic
part of its dependent, now its host (Adams 2013, ch. XXIII).24 This treadmill already started in
23
24
S. Luraghi 2010:21-23 on valency dependency of local relations in Latin.
According to Norberg 1946:84-87, development of essive use of de in compound adverbs
originates, by the model of desuper, in locutions where the localized entity acts from above,
but does not move downwards. De would thus repeat the development from ablative to essive
that ab had undergone a few centuries earlier, in a tergo ‘in back’ etc.
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
19
Old Latin, witness adverbs like deorsum ‘down(wards)’. In Romance, it is particularly evident
in the locative interrogative pro-adverb. Latin ubi ‘where’ gives Old Castilian o, as in E46.
E46
CASTIL.
las eglesias o yazen sus cuerpos (Alfonso X, Siete partidas I [1256])
‘the churches where their corpses lie’
This is reinforced by superordinate de, yielding do. This word, however, is not attested in the
corpus to signal an ablative relation. Instead, all of its occurrences (first in a document of
1130) involve an essive relation, as in E47.
E47
CASTIL.
aquella [celada] do antes estavan (Libro de los buenos proverbios que dijeron los
filósofos y sabios antiguos [1250], §5)
‘that ambush where they were before’
While do falls into disuse, the proform meaning ‘whence’ is renewed by onde, which continues Latin unde. It appears with this meaning in E48.
E48
CASTIL.
sodes de los de Vanigómez, onde salién condes de prez e de valor, (Cantar del
Mío Cid [1140], tirada 149)
‘you are from the family of Vani-Gómez, from where originate counts of honor
and value,’
However, already in the same text, onde is used in essive sense:
E49
CASTIL.
Salúdavos mio Cid allá onde elle está; (Cantar del Mío Cid [1140], tirada 83)
‘My Cid greets you from where he is [lit.: there where he is];’
Still in Old Castilian, onde is reinforced by de to force the ablative meaning. The new interrogative adverb appears in E50.
E50
CASTIL.
aquella çibdat dont era Anchos (Libro de los buenos proverbios que dijeron los
filósofos y sabios antiguos [1250], §5)
‘that town from where Anchos was’
But to no avail: at the same time, we find the first evidence of donde being used in essive
sense, as in E51.
E51
CASTIL.
ha de dar vía por donde usen e vayan (Libro de los doce sabios o Tratado de la
nobleza y lealtad [1237], §16)
‘he has to make way where they may graze and walk’
Still at the same time, the first occurrences of de donde ‘from where’ are attested, as in E52.
E52
CASTIL.
tomando asi del fuero biejo como del nueuo, de donde mejor se pudo enformar,
(Crónica de Sahagún [1255], §12)
‘thus taking both from the old and from the new jurisdiction, from where he could
best inform himself’
This is, then, a series of four renewals and reinforcements of a local adverb within one century. Astonishingly, the situation appears to have remained stable since that time.
7.3
Preposition from primary preposition plus preposition
The preceding sections have shown that the combination of a preposition coding a local relation with a (prepositional) adverb coding a spatial region is rather regular. What is indeed very
rare is the combination of two prepositions. The reason is obviously that, on the one hand,
items designating spatial regions are not mere prepositions, but (prepositional) adverbs, and
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
20
on the other hand, that there is no semantosyntactic basis for the direct combination of two
items that merely indicate local relations.
The Latin-Castilian history provides three exceptions to this generalization. 25 One of
them, Castilian para ‘to’, based on Late Latin per/pro ad ‘through to’, is a case of its own not
to be treated here.26 The other two will be briefly reviewed. They are the Latin prepositions
trans ‘beyond’ and ex ‘out of’, and they prove the rule. Both belong to the kind of morpheme
mentioned in §2.1 whose meaning combines a local relation with a spatial region. Trans
means ‘in an essive or allative relation to the region on the yonder side of X’; ex means ‘in an
ablative relation to the interior of X’. Thus, they might as well be prepositional adverbs.
A late example of the combination of trans with superordinate de was already given as
E1a. A much earlier example is E53.
E53
LATIN
secutae sunt eum turbae multae de Galilaea ... et de trans Iordanem. (Vulgate
[390] Mt. 4, 25)
‘large crowds from Galilee ... and from the region across the Jordan followed
him.’
The Vulgate is a Late Latin text which tries to follow the rules of Classical Latin to the extent
feasible. Trans is one of the items for which the grammarians’ verdict 27 is unreasonable, since
it designates a spatial region. It is only logical that, as mentioned at the end of §7.1.3, the
Castilian heirs to Latin trans function as prepositional adverbs. E53 works as if this were
already the case in Late Latin.
At the beginning, Castilian detrás conserves the ablative meaning. Once it is a prepositional adverb, it takes its complement via the relationalizer, as in E54.
E54
CASTIL.
Et el lobo, que yazía en çelada, saltó en ella detrás de una peña do estava (Calila e
Dimna [1251], p. 351)
‘And the wolf, who was lying in an ambush, jumped on her from behind a crag
where he was’
As usual, de forfeits its ablative function very soon. Moreover, the relationalized preposition
becomes available for further expansion by a superordinate preposition, as in E55.
E55
CASTIL.
fue para el por detras de los otros, (Historia troyana en prosa y verso [1270], p.
264)
‘he went for/towards him following the others,’
Just as después mentioned before, detrás now forms a binary paradigm with delante. The fate
of detrás is, to this extent, a case of paradigmaticization.
The case of the Latin preposition ex ‘out of’ is largely parallel. The word is not conserved
as such in Romance. Like trans, it is combined with the superordinate preposition de as if it
were a prepositional adverb only designating a spatial region. E56 is close to the original local
sense; E57 presents the temporal sense.
25
Hamp 1888:325f enumerates a set of prepositions formed by combining a primary preposition with versus ‘-wards’. However, all of these products can alternatively be analyzed as
recategorizations of past participles of verba composita of vertere ‘turn’.
26
S. Torres Cacoullos & Bauman 2014 and Bauman & Torres Cacoullos 2016, §4 for the origins of
per ad and pro ad and their univerbation into pora > para.
27
The grammarian Maurus Servius Honoratius (Comm. Donati artem mai. [~390], Keil IV 440)
declares such constructions as de trans Tiberim venio ‘I am coming from beyond the Tiber’ ungrammatical.
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
E56
21
invenit unum de ex conservis suis (Itala, Cod. Vindobonensis 1185 [~400], Mt. 18,
28)
‘he found one of his fellow slaves’
LATIN
E57
coniugi karissimae vixit cum eo de ex die virginitatis sue (CIL 14, 5210 [Late
Latin])
‘for his beloved wife who lived with him since her virginity’
LATIN
In medieval Ibero-Romance Latin, ex did not occur without preceding de and was already
generalized to even more abstract senses, as in E58 (Company Company & Sobrevilla
Moreno 2014:1381f mention earlier occurrences of univerbated deex).
E58
iuxta limitem vineam de mihi [sic!] Eximino, et de ex alia vinearum multarum ex
alios homines, (Monasterio de San Martín de Villariezo, Sale contract [1044])
‘[a lot] beside the border of the vineyard of Msg. Jimeno, and on the second [side
bordering on] many vineyards of other people,’
LATIN
From the first Castilian documents, the combination takes the form of the preposition des
‘from X on’, which first figures in Latin documents [947] in the fomula des odie die ‘from
today’s date’. Des as a plain preposition disappears from the texts in the course of the seventeenth century (Company Company & Sobrevilla Moreno 2014:1386). It had been reanalyzed
to follow the majority model of the prepositional adverb, so its prepositional use required the
relationalizer de. The resulting des de, first attested in the Documentos del Monasterio de
Santa María de Trianos [1191], was univerbated, and the fomula desde oy dia is already
found in a document of 1249.
In contemporary Spanish, desde conserves both the local and the temporal sense and is
finally becoming the new ablative preposition the language has lacked for more than a thousand years, witness examples like E59f.
E59
SPANISH
E60
SPANISH
agua pura desde una fuente natural (publicity for mineral water in Costa Rica
[2016])
‘pure water from a natural spring’
desde un ángulo distribucional (Company Company & Sobrevilla Moreno 2014:
1345)
‘from a distributional point of view’
A few centuries earlier, these phrases would have contained, and might even today contain, de
instead of desde. This is, thus, an example of grammaticalization.28 Desde is the first and only
complex preposition which is univerbated with the relationalizer. This is doubtless due to the
fact that this particular preposition has never had adverbial use; in other words, from the day
that it switched from direct government to mediate government, it never again occurred without the relationalizer.
8
Conclusion
A traditional etymological analysis of complex prepositions like Castilian desde ‘since’ does
not get beyond a mere juxtaposition29 of monomorphemic prepositions like de+ex+de. A syntactic analysis reveals a hierarchical structure in such formations:
28
Klöden 2001:65 observes a parallel development of French depuis.
29
Vänänen 1967:95 does speak of “juxtaposés”.
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
22
(1) Expansion: The combination of an adverbial or prepositional base with a preceding
superordinate primary preposition, including de, initially specifies the local relation of the
base, but ends up as its category-preserving reinforcement.
(2) Relationalization: The combination of a base with a following primary preposition like
de relationalizes the base, converting it into a complex preposition.
Expansions are endocentric and therefore recursive. Relationalization is exocentric and therefore not recursive. Because of its endocentricity, expansion is indifferent as to application of
relationalization. This is the structural condition which, combined with the condition of its
semantic neutrality, favors univerbation of expansive formations. On the other hand, adverbial
use of a prepositional adverb and use as a relationalized preposition are in a regular syntactic
relationship, so the adjacency of the prepositional adverb with the relationalizer does not get
fixed and is therefore not prone to univerbation. In fact, desde is the only Castilian preposition
resulting from univerbation. This is easily explicable by the fact that it is the only relationalized preposition which does not alternate with an adverb. Moreover, the two processes are
independent of each other and therefore not ordered synchronically or diachronically. A
preposition, an adverb or a prepositional adverb may be expanded at any time, and an adverb
may be relationalized at any time.
Almost all of the complex prepositions attested in the Latin and Castilian corpus are written as separate words before they are univerbated. There is, thus, historical eveidence for a
diachronic relation between a syntactic construction X Y and a word XY. This is not the
diachronic pattern found with true compounds. It is thus clear that the far majority of socalled compound prepositions in Latin and Castilian are not compounds in the technical sense,
but univerbations of earlier syntactic constructions. The univerbation is a symptom of the lexicalization of such syntactic combinations.
The evidence adduced proves that there is unbroken continuity between Late Latin and
early Romance in the formation of complex prepositions. More precisely, the wealth of complex prepositions in Late Latin texts is a reflection in writing of the proliferation of this
species in early Romance. The prohibition against complex prepositions declared and
imposed by classical writers and their grammarians is a self-restraint of the classical variety of
Latin. The proliferation of complex prepositions in the colloquial variety shows that there was
a strong drift in the language to put up a complete system of case relators in the form of
prepositions.
Although the analysis has mainly been concerned with complex prepositions originating
in univerbation, there is no doubt that other complex prepositions are formed by compounding. Compound prepositions are prepositions, just as compound nouns are nouns. If we take
this seriously, it becomes clear that the linguistic doctrine of adpositions as a closed class is a
myth.30 The wealth and productivity of prepositions in Latin and Romance is absolutely representative of this class in European languages. The Latin-Romance prepositions illustrate in a
perfect way the treadmill of the never-ending reinforcement and renewal of case relators. The
30
This is noted, among many others, in Fagard & De Mulder 2007:12 and the literature cited there.
The doctrine is to be traced back at least to Brøndal 1950:13 and divulgated in Lyons 1986, ch. 9.5.2.
In Brøndal 1950, the closed-class nature of prepositions is clearly a postulate, not an empirical gener alization. However, it is possible to conceive word classes independently of this criterion and then
ascertain empirically their open- or closedness. Note, however, that literally every linguistic class can
be enriched by linguistic change. (Thus, Fagard 2006:92 is mistaken in tying the observation of the
openness of the class of prepositions to the diachronic perspective.) Consequently, for a linguistic class
to be closed does not mean that it cannot be enriched. It means that there are no processes of the lin guistic system to enrich it; s. Lehmann 2013, §6.
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
23
word formation of adpositions differs from nominal word formation in being practically independent from the world of denotata: there is no external necessity to designate new things.
Most of the new adpositions get lexicalized with meanings very close to their bases and, by
grammaticalization, converge on a limited set of case relations (s. Hagège 2010, ch. 5). Thus,
the formation of adpositions illustrates a powerful principle of linguistic change: there is
much variation just for the sake of variation.
References
Adams, James N. 2013, Social variation and the Latin language. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press.
Bauman, Joseph & Torres Cacoullos, Rena 2016, "The generalization of preposition <i>para</i> via
fusion and ensuing loss of compositionality." Tortora, Christina & den Dikken, Marcel & Montoya, Ignacio L. & O'Neill, Teresa (eds.), Romance linguistics 2013. Selected papers from the
43rd Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), New York, 17–19 April, 2013. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: J. Benjamins (Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory, 9); 39-58.
Bourdin, Philippe 1997, "On goal-bias across languages: modal, configurational and orientational
parameters." Palek, Bohumil (ed.), Typology: prototypes, item orderings and universals. Proceedings of the conference held in Prague August 20-22, 1996. Praha: Charles University Press (Acta
Universitatis Carolinae; Philologica, 1996, 3-4, Proceedings of LP '96); 185-218.
Brøndal, Viggo 1950, Théorie des prépositions. Introduction à une sémantique rationnelle. København: E. Munksgaard.
Company Company, Concepción & Sobrevilla Moreno, Zazil 2014, "Las preposiciones de, des y
desde." Company Company, Concepción (ed.), Sintaxis histórica de la lengua española. Tercera
parte: Adverbios, preposiciones y conjunciones: relaciones interoracionales. México D.F.: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; 1341-1478.
Fagard, Benjamin 2006, "La grammaticalisation en question: du latin aux langues romanes modernes."
Modèles linguistiques 53:91-110.
Fagard, Benjamin & De Mulder, Walter 2007, "La formation des prépositions complexes: grammaticalisation ou lexicalisation?" Langue Française 156:9-29.
Hagège, Claude 2010, Adpositions. Function-marking in human languages. Oxford & New York:
Oxford University Press (Oxford Studies in Typology and Linguistic Theory).
Hamp, Carl 1888, "Die zusammengesetzten Präpositionen im Lateinischen." Archiv für lateinische
Lexikographie und Grammatik 5:321-368.
Harrington, Karl. P. 1997, Medieval Latin. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press (Second
ed. rev. by Joseph Pucci).
Hofmann, Johann Baptist & Szantyr, Anton 1965, Lateinische Syntax und Stilistik. München: C.H.
Beck (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft, 2/2/2).
Kailuweit, Rolf 2001, "Lexeme, Kasusmarker, Relatoren? Überlegungen zu den spanischen Präpo sitionen unter dem Aspekt der Grammatikalisierung." Schäfer-Prieß, Barbara & Klöden,
Hildegard & Kailuweit, Rolf (eds.), Grammatikalisierung in den iberoromanischen Sprachen.
Wilhelmsfeld: G. Egert; 33-62.
Klöden, Hildegard 2001, "Grammatikalisierung im Bereich der Präpositionen : Spanisch und Französisch im Vergleich." Schäfer-Prieß, Barbara & Klöden, Hildegard & Kailuweit, Rolf (eds.),
Grammatikalisierung in den iberoromanischen Sprachen. Wilhelmsfeld: G. Egert; 63-75.
Kortmann, Bernd & König, Ekkehard 1992, "Categorial reanalysis: the case of deverbal prepositions."
Linguistics 30:671-697.
Lehmann, Christian 1992, “Yukatekische lokale Relatoren in typologischer Perspektive”. Zeitschrift
für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 45:626-641.
Lehmann, Christian 1998, “Regiones espaciales en perspectiva tipológica”. García-Hernández, Benjamin (ed.), Estudios de lingüística latina. Actas del IX Coloquio Internacional de Lingüística
Christian Lehmann, Complex spatial prepositions from Latin to Castilian
24
Latina, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 14-18 de abril de 1997. Madrid: Ed. Clásicas; 455466.
Lehmann, Christian 2013, “The nature of parts of speech”. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 66/2:141-177.
Löfstedt, Einar 1959, Late Latin. Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz; Oslo: Aschehong (W.Nygaard) etc.
(Instituttet for Sammenlignende Kulturforskning, A/25).
Luraghi, Silvia 2010, "Adverbial phrases." Baldi, Philip & Cuzzolin, Pierluigi (eds.), New perspectives on historical Latin syntax. Volume 2: Constituent syntax: Adverbial phrases, adverbs, mood,
tense. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter (Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs, 180.2); 19107.
Norberg, Dag 1944, Beiträge zur spätlateinischen Syntax. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell; Leipzig: Harrassowitz.
Ricca, Davide 2010, "Adverbs." Baldi, Philip & Cuzzolin, Pierluigi (eds.), New perspectives on historical Latin syntax. Volume 2: Constituent syntax: Adverbial phrases, adverbs, mood, tense.
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter (Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs, 180.2); 109-191.
Rubio, Lisardo 1966, Introducción a la sintaxis estructural del latin. Vol. I: Casos y preposiciones.
Barcelona: Ariel (Colección "Convivium", 4).
Torres Cacoullos, Rena & Bauman, Joseph 2014, "Las preposiciones por, pora y para." Company
Company, Concepción (ed.), Sintaxis histórica de la lengua española. Tercera parte: Adverbios,
preposiciones y conjunciones: relaciones interoracionales. México D.F.: Universidad Nacional
Autónoma de México; 1479-1564.
Väänänen, Veikko 1967, Introduction au latin vulgaire. Deuxième édition avec anthologie de textes.
Paris: Klincksieck (Bibliothèque Française et Romane, A/6) (2. Auflage; 1. Auflage: 1963).